By the way, that’s a beautiful photo of the F-22.

Mr. H
http://www.allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/

[/nitpick]

Besides, I’m only the Intel analyst that trained on the air frame.

Surely I don’t know what the hell I’m talking about.

Second, I think 2 1000lb JDAMS is plenty, especially when you consider that it will most likely be more than one Raptor going after a missile site. And 1000 lbs is all you need when you can release a bomb at faster than the speed of sound.

Third, I don’t feel like going to jail and spilling all the classified details about that jet.

Lastly, we aren’t good at predicting the next war. It’s usually the stuff we have in short supply that we need the most when we start fighting.

The F22 has only internal stores, which are limited and if you started hanging external stores the stealth stuff goes to heck. Air to Mud in any form is not what the F22 was designed to do. It’s really that simple and that’s why the 11th hour re-marketing push by the Fighter pilot’s union is not going to work.

The F16 Weasel and the F/A 18 G are designed and have the avionics to take on the SAM threat. Not to mention that with a small fleet of F22′s, 130 or even 250 aircraft, nobody is going to use them for the SEAD mission for no other reason than the magic golden BB is always out there.

The reason why no one will send an F-18 or F-16 on a mission for SEAD/DEAD is that an SA 10 would see them miles away, and most likely take them down.

Look up the F-16 that got downed in Bosnia. That was downed by an SA-6.

The F-22′s stealth capabilities not only make it a great Air to Air platform, but an even better Air to Ground platform. Once we have destroyed the SAMs, and destroyed enemy aircraft, then we can through F-16′s, F-15E’s, F-18′s and the JSF at whatever is left.

It’s time for a new argument.

The F/A 22 whoops not supposed to call it that anymore, is a fine airplane, but it is not a F/A18G, or an F16 Wild Weasel or a lot of other very capable aircraft well suited to real SEAD missions, now and in the foreseeable future. The F22 is a pure bred Air Combat machine that turns and burns like nobody’s business and even if you can find it, it’s darn hard to take on even in a non fair fight. But that’s the problem. It’s an airplane that is looking for a mission and “could be” a SEAD mission vehicle is a pretty weak card to play, as was calling it the F/A 22 a few years back to put the smell of air to mud on it.

Wing Zero, with respect, unless you’re a whole heck of a lot smarter than Secretary Gates and a whole host of Pentagon types, you’re fighting a loosing battle over a weapon system that while not obsolete, was designed to counter a threat that nobody is predicting will come up anytime soon. The F15 and F16 fleet while old, are still a pretty darn good air superiority sharp end of the stick, and the JSF is not exactly going to be a slouch ether, in both the Air Combat mission and the air to mud missions.

Sorry arguing a SEAD role for the F22 is just more fighter pilot marketing of the F22.

Just nit pickin’.

But not a bleeding last one of you bean counters knows the true capabilities of the F-22, or a bleeding thing about the use of Air Power in combat situations.

My first thought to the “overpowered” crowd – Where is your head? Did not Reagan himself champion “Peace through Strength”?

Do you want to send up 30 of our pilots in aged F-15′s and have 15 of them come back, or do you want to send 20 Raptors, and have all 20 come back?

Yes, the F-22 was designed with an Air Superiority mission in mind, but also has a second and I would say more important mission – taking out “double digit” SAMs ( Surface to Air missles).

Should we have to strike North Korea or Iran, or God forbid we go to war with China, Surface to Air missiles will HAVE to be destroyed for our other mission objectives to be achieved. These SAMs have such advanced capabilities, that only one Fighter Air Craft will be able to take down an SA-10 or SA-20 – the F-22.

The F-15 is a fine Air Craft, but is has limitations. It has aged gracefully, but make no mistake, it has aged. You can give it all the neat avionics and engine upgrades you want, but the actual Air Frame has limitations.

This is what we NEED to have ready – a Fighter Air Craft that can take down anything now or the next 10 to 15 years in the Air or on the ground.

Wing Zero – Former USAF 1N0 – supported F-15′s AND F-22′s.

What I do have a problem with is the termination of the program, and simultaneous retirement of a big chunk of our fighter fleet with out a viable replacement in place to replace that which we are doing away with. That is dangerous to national security.

I see all this as nothing but a cash cow the Democrats want to gore for claiming budget cuts and cost savings at a time we can least afford it.

Again, you could very well be right on the costs, I just do not know the full story… So I was just hoping to siphon off the info you had. Thanks for understanding that I was sincerely asking you a question, sometimes this text thing can be taken the wrong way.

Again, you could very well be right on the costs, I just do not know the full story… So I was just hoping to siphon off the info you had. Thanks for understanding that I was sincerely asking you a question, sometimes this text thing can be taken the wrong way.

The current president retires 250 fighters now, as well as cuts the remaining fighter production now. The replacement they are relying on is not ready for delivery due to problems as well.

Do we rely on the Russians for fighter cover if we get in a war with China on the Korean peninsula?

just asking….

Bush had a review and reduced the number of F-22′s that was planned to be built. However Bush II did not plan to gut 250 fighter aircraft in 2010 nor was he going to cancel the F-22 program. Obama is doing that, not Bush.

There is a big difference.

For me, the build up to the election with those on our side who did make the argument about the election (because of their extreme dislike of McCain) that it didn’t matter who won – is something that I hope and pray that we don’t go through ever again.

Since you were commenting on the issue of the F-22 alone, then of course my generalized, election comment doesn’t apply. As I said, I hope that we never have to see another unfortunate run up to the election like we saw in 2008 again.

The plan to cut the F22 was begun under President Bush and Secretary Gates, did they get it wrong?

While the Fighter Pilots Union of the AF may not like it, Tankers, UAV’s and Trash haulers are also part, some would argue more of a mission, today and in the future for the AF. The Air Superiority mission is still going to be there, but there are a whole heck of a lot more important things the AF is being called on to do than paying for and maintaining a fleet of aircraft which were designed in the 90′s for a Soviet treat that is long gone.

By the way, I worked on heavies, 52 G’s and RC 135′s. I test them now and see F 22′s flying every day. I’ve even been inside the enlles. I’ve even been in the engine bay of the JSF that’s over at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center, it’s a way cool aircraft.